User talk:Lutrinae

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Lutrinae! Thank you for your contributions. I am Shrike and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Shrike (talk) 12:55, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notification

Hi, Lutrinae. There's no action that's necessary on your part, and I've made no complaint of any kind about you in doing so, but I did wish to inform you that I've asked at the administrator's noticeboard for incidents that you be made formally aware of the restrictions and policies that Palestine - Israel articles are subject to under ARBPIA and WP:ARBPIA2. I expect you're probably already aware of these, since you've edited in the topic area as an anon/IP previously, but I thought it best to make sure. Cheers, – OhioStandard (talk) 20:41, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Palestinian people

Please stop edit-warring on the article.

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you engage in further inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read in the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles#Final decision section of the decision page.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page.

— Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration enforcement

See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Lutrinae and include any comments you would like to make in the section reserved for you. Sean.hoyland - talk 10:21, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Topic-banned and account restricted

In connection with this request for arbitration enforcement, you are restricted as follows, under the provisions of WP:ARBPIA#Discretionary sanctions. You are prohibited for 4 months from editing any page that relates, broadly interpreted, to the Arab-Israeli conflict. That prohibition applies to you personally, and so to any account (anonymous or registered) that you edit from. If you edit any such page, from any account, at any point until 11:21, 7 October 2011 (UTC), your account will be blocked from editing.

Additionally, because of your history of sock-puppetry, you are prohibited for 1 year from editing any Israel/Palestine article from any account except this account, User:Lutrinae. If at any point you need to change your primary account, you must notify the Arbitration Committee of the account that you are changing to. If you edit any Israel/Palestine page from any account other than this one (or other than an account that you have disclosed to ArbCom) at any point until 11:21, 7 June 2012 (UTC), any or all of your accounts, and any or all of your IP addresses or ranges, will be blocked from editing.

If you do not drastically improve the standard of your editing, for instance by not removing all pictures of people of Palestinian ethnicity without discussion, then your accounts will be summarily blocked from editing by any administrator. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and your behaviour must reflect the required standards of professionalism and adherence to our core policies. Please contact me or any other uninvolved administrator if you require further guidance or assistance. AGK [•] 11:31, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and follow the instructions there to appeal your block.

Notice to administrators: In a March 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."

You've been blocked for evading your ban from I/P articles. See WP:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive92#Lutrinae. Your block may be lifted if you will agree to follow our policies, observe your ban, and stop abusing multiple accounts. EdJohnston (talk) 02:20, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Lutrinae (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The ban was for articles in the Israel-Palestine Conflict. I didn't edit any articles in that area. My edits were on user talk pages. They are not covered in the topic ban.

I've respected the I-P ban, but it didn't take away my priviledge to participate in User talk page discussions. They aren't seen by ordinary users, and aren't concidered "articles."

I used to edit with whatever IP address I was given automatically, usually beginning with 132. But I never tried to sockpuppet with the addresses as if I was more than one person. When I created this Lutrinae account I made it plain that I was 132 and again did not try to be multiple editors.

I know the ban was recomended in good faith, but it is mistaken, I believe, to include user talkpages in the earlier ban.

Decline reason:

There was no exception for talk pages in your I-P ban; it says "any page", not "any article". --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 21:32, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Lutrinae (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The ban is for any page that is related to the I-P conflict. A user talk page is not related to a topic. The ban was enforced to prevent readers from being exposed to my supposedly harmful editting. Readers read articles, talk pages are mostly for editors. We don't need to make user talk pages encyclopedic, therefore they don't need to be protected from unencyclopedic editing. So somantics aside, the ban was to stop me from editing I-P pages. User talk pages are not part of the "content" of Wikipedia. User talk pages can be called "pages," but I believe that the Admin who made the I-P ban used "page" to mean encyclopedia pages, and not any piece of Wikipedia. Lutrinae (talk) 19:21, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=The ban is for any page that is related to the I-P conflict. A user talk page is not related to a topic. The ban was enforced to prevent readers from being exposed to my supposedly harmful editting. Readers read articles, talk pages are mostly for editors. We don't need to make user talk pages encyclopedic, therefore they don't need to be protected from unencyclopedic editing.

So somantics aside, the ban was to stop me from editing I-P pages. User talk pages are not part of the "content" of Wikipedia. User talk pages can be called "pages," but I believe that the Admin who made the I-P ban used "page" to mean encyclopedia pages, and not any piece of Wikipedia. [[User:Lutrinae|Lutrinae]] ([[User talk:Lutrinae#top|talk]]) 19:21, 19 July 2011 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=The ban is for any page that is related to the I-P conflict. A user talk page is not related to a topic. The ban was enforced to prevent readers from being exposed to my supposedly harmful editting. Readers read articles, talk pages are mostly for editors. We don't need to make user talk pages encyclopedic, therefore they don't need to be protected from unencyclopedic editing.

So somantics aside, the ban was to stop me from editing I-P pages. User talk pages are not part of the "content" of Wikipedia. User talk pages can be called "pages," but I believe that the Admin who made the I-P ban used "page" to mean encyclopedia pages, and not any piece of Wikipedia. [[User:Lutrinae|Lutrinae]] ([[User talk:Lutrinae#top|talk]]) 19:21, 19 July 2011 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=The ban is for any page that is related to the I-P conflict. A user talk page is not related to a topic. The ban was enforced to prevent readers from being exposed to my supposedly harmful editting. Readers read articles, talk pages are mostly for editors. We don't need to make user talk pages encyclopedic, therefore they don't need to be protected from unencyclopedic editing.

So somantics aside, the ban was to stop me from editing I-P pages. User talk pages are not part of the "content" of Wikipedia. User talk pages can be called "pages," but I believe that the Admin who made the I-P ban used "page" to mean encyclopedia pages, and not any piece of Wikipedia. [[User:Lutrinae|Lutrinae]] ([[User talk:Lutrinae#top|talk]]) 19:21, 19 July 2011 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}